Ask yourselves: Are we the bad guys?

One can fault the British for many things but not for their sense of humour. Some time ago I saw a sketch by the comedy duo Mitchell and Webb. They played two German soldiers, sitting in a fortified position at the front, enjoying the relative quiet of the moment. They were dressed in SS uniforms. In that typically British roundabout way of starting an awkward conversation one of them begins to talk about their uniforms. He has noticed something odd, something off-kilter. Their uniforms have skulls on them. So he asks the other one why that would be. In the following discussion they try to come up with positive associations with skulls. They try to find a valid reason why their uniforms would have skulls on them. When they fail to do so and can only come up with negative associations the first one looks the other in the eye and asks hesitantly “Are we the bad guys?”

It’s a funny sketch partly because with our knowledge and morality of today the idea of two SS-men wondering if they are the bad guys is almost grotesque. Off course they are the bad guys. “How could they not have known they were the bad guys?” Many will have this thought flash through their minds in some way or other. It is generally posed as a rhetorical question as it’s so obvious it requires no further deliberation. That is a mistake though. It’s a very serious question. It needs exploring because it goes to the root of why good men are capable of doing, or supporting, great evil. So let’s explore it. Why didn’t the Germans consider themselves to be the bad guys?

Let’s start with the skulls. Putting skulls on uniforms wasn’t unique to the SS. It had a long tradition in the German army and before that in the Prussian army. It was used by the hussars for example on their hats. One likely reason the SS used it was to tap into this history, to present themselves not as something completely new but as a new way of continuing old German traditions or if you like as one of different ways they tried to legitimize themselves as part of German society. Keep this trick of trying to look like something you’re not in mind. Nor were the Germans the only ones to use it, nor was it a purely military thing. If the skulls alone denote ‘evil’ what does that say of the Skull and Bones society which has many of Americas elite, even former presidents, among its members? Skulls have had many symbolic meanings throughout human history. Judging historical use with a narrow contemporary view will lead to wrong conclusions. So no, the presence of skulls on their uniform was not a dead give-away of being ‘the’ bad guys. Unfortunately this simplistic view, especially judging the ‘other’ with ones own limited viewpoint, is commonplace. Point to one very specific aspect that is easily identifiable as ‘bad’ from your point of view, ignoring context, and presto. You have your bad guys. Given that we are conditioned to view the world in absolutes that also gives you your good guys. If one side is bad, the other must be good.

For Germans in the 1930’s it was far from obvious they were the bad guys. They had lost the first world war, a war they felt was forced upon them by other countries. They had requested an armistice, believed they were promised a fair settlement and were then betrayed at Versailles. Some, maybe most, believed that the war was not lost at the front by the army but back home by spineless politicians. Hadn’t the army defeated the Russians on the eastern front after all? Germany lost significant parts of what it considered to be its ‘Heimat’ permanently while other parts were occupied by the allies. The exorbitant reparations they were forced to pay drove the country into economic misery. In other words, Germans largely felt themselves to be the victims of injustice. They felt robbed, they felt threatened, they felt betrayed, they felt wronged. So when someone came along who helped make things right, off course they went along. The economy improved, unemployment went down, political stability returned, the army was strengthened, lost parts of the ‘Heimat’ were regained and a settlement with the Soviets was arranged. From their point of view these were good things, worthy achievements even if it came with rough edges. When world war two broke out, it’s also easy to imagine this was seen as a reaction of the western powers to the resurgence of Germany as a continental power. It was just a new phase in a centuries old political game. This time though, the manner in which the conflict played out was much, much darker as civilians became the target in very direct ways. I’ll leave the rest of what happened for what it is. You all know the story.

When it finally ended Germans were, collectively, blamed for the crimes and misdeeds of their government. For most of them these came as a shock. Some were in denial and refused to accept them as true. Most accepted them though, especially when the stories of the average soldiers who had served on the eastern front or as occupation troops became more widespread. Given what they had seen and done, the camps didn’t seem that farfetched. While some argued over the details of what happened there and over exact numbers, and some still do, there’s no doubt of the brutality and wide scale murder that took place. The treatment of ordinary Soviet citizens and Soviet prisoners of war alone are testament to the evil nature of the Nazi regime. Note that this does not mean that their opponents were pure as snow. Whatever the misdeeds and crimes committed by the allies and Soviets, these do not justify or excuse what the Germans did in any way. It did make it easier though to see them as the bad guys and by inference, themselves as the good guys.

The Germans argued they hadn’t known what had been going on, other Germans were to blame, ‘Wir haben es nicht gewusst’. But looking at the scale of what happened we wonder how they could not have known. There were plenty of signs, plenty of proof in plain sight, not to mention all the public rhetoric their leaders had used. How could they not realize what was happening? How could they not know the murderous nature of their state? The counterargument against the German people can be paraphrased as ‘you could have known and you should have known’ combined with ‘looking away from what is happening in order not to see it does not absolve you of guilt.’ And truth be told, after the war the German people did carry this guilt collectively. They did realize how wrong they had been. But they also struggled with the question of how this had crept up upon them. How could they have been so blind? Individuals who had always thought of themselves as good people had somehow been led astray and had become more than just bad guys, they had supported and facilitated evil. And that question is crucial. If it could happen to the Germans, it can happen to others too. As Herman Goring said, “you don’t need the support of a majority of the population, you only need about 5% of them behind you as long as it’s the right 5%.” Does that sound familiar to anyone?

It’s easy to point fingers at a few guilty individuals but ultimately it takes a state with all its trappings to commit atrocities on this scale. And it wasn’t just the Germans who got caught up in this. Just look at how easily and seamlessly local authorities in conquered countries cooperated with the occupation authorities. Local police enforced German policies without much resistance. They cooperated to combat resistance groups and to arrest whomever the Germans wanted. People tend to have a natural inclination to follow institutionalized authority without questioning its moral legitimacy. Its moral legitimacy is assumed as nearly all people consider themselves to be, individually and collectively, the good guys, irrespective of the specific collective used to identify with. Given that we all are members of different collectives at any given time, it’s easy to use, consciously or subconsciously, a collective whose moral authority is obvious to ourselves. We then confuse the self-image we have of our morality with the morality of the institutions that rule our daily life.

Many in the western world identify as Christians for example and the Christian creed and morality is beyond doubt for them. So it becomes easy to say to one self ‘as Christians we have the moral high ground so obviously we (our institutions/governments) are the good guys’. In the west we also consider ourselves to be democracies and we elevate this onto the highest of pedestals ‘we are democracies, the most righteous form of government and therefor we hold the moral high ground so obviously we (our institutions/governments) are the good guys’. Even more abstract is the notion that we, in the west, are ‘free’ and therefor have the moral authority over those countries where ‘the people’ are ‘not free’. We believe that gives us the moral high ground so obviously we (our institutions/governments) are the good guys. We have become moral Pavlov-dogs. Dangle a so-called noble cause in front of us and any action, any action, undertaken by us (our institutions/governments) instantly becomes justified no matter what the morality of that action itself actually is. We have killed, directly or indirectly, children not by the hundreds, not by the thousands, not by the tens of thousands but by the hundreds of thousands over the last few decades in order to make the world ‘free’ and ‘safe for democracy’. Somehow that’s okay with us. But when our own government tells us Assad killed some children with chemical weapons (cue Pavlov-reaction) no proof is required and we accept ‘something’ must be done. Why? Because we (our institutions/governments) are the good guys and we’ve been conditioned to think that the good guys don’t lie. Despite all the lies we’ve witnessed we still think of them as incidents, not as the rule. It’s always individuals that lied or did wrong. ‘Tony Blair lied the UK into the Iraq war’. No, everyone did. The whole system is corrupted, not just individuals in it. The system rules and changes the individuals, not the other way around. We justify our belief in our authorities by saying that if it wasn’t true ‘someone’ would speak up. Lies that big can’t hold up. But when people do speak up we ignore or ridicule them, calling them conspiracy nuts. And a suspiciously large number of them have car accidents, commit suicide, are on planes that crash, suddenly get cancer or are the victim of robberies gone wrong. The scale of our self-delusion is mind-boggling.

For the Germans during and before world war two a similar association took hold. They felt they had been wronged in many ways after the first world war and that as the victims of that war they were only trying to make right those wrongs. So to them the moral authority obviously belonged to them no matter what they (their institutions/government) did. They saw themselves as the good guys. Period. At most they recognized some rough edges but not enough to question the moral authority of what they (their institutions/government) were doing. Latch on to one belief of absolute moral authority and the gates to mass-murder and atrocities are wide open. Machiavelli’s best known observation is the mechanism of ‘the goal justifies the means’ as a political tool. This also applies to morality. If people are convinced of their own moral superiority they stop questioning their actions. Any action is allowed. But moral authority never rests with just belief or creed or conviction. It is not absolute, it is not unquestionable. Ones morality is determined by ones actions and by ones inactions, not by belief. Remember, looking away in order not to be confronted by unpleasant realities is not a valid excuse to claim innocence. Not acting is a moral choice too. Not questioning your assumptions is also a moral choice. ‘God is on our side’ or its equivalent has been uttered by just about every side in a war at some point even when the warring sides were of the exact same religion. Now looking back that looks as absurd as two members of the SS wondering if they are the bad guys. But when you don’t question moral authority, when you simply assume it then both of these make complete sense.

Which begs the question, how will people in the future look back at us and our historical era? I am a citizen of one the western countries that thinks of itself as free, democratic and based on Judaeo-Christian moral authority. My fellow countrymen and women consider themselves to be the good guys. It’s so ingrained into the national consciousness it’s like a super-dogma. By implication they consider what their government does, especially internationally, morally good. ‘They are us and since we are good so too must they be’ the thinking, if any, goes. And yet domestically they denounce individual politicians and political parties in large numbers as corrupt, self-serving and elitist. The traditional political parties in most western countries are taking a beating in the polls as they are seen to represent not the people but their own pockets and supranational interests. Voters flock en masse to the so-called populist parties on both the left and right of the political spectrum. We denounce the European Union as completely undemocratic and ruled by technocrats who are at the beck-and-call of big business. Fewer and fewer of us consider ourselves to be Christians and even if we do it’s a vague sort of watered down version without much substance or clear morality. The popular narrative in fact is to be inclusive of ‘the other’ and their convictions. All creeds and convictions are supposedly equal. Tell that to the Kali-worshippers. And although we question and discard the very foundations of our own freedoms, our own democracy and our own Christian-based morality domestically, we still believe that our national and supranational governments and their attached institutions somehow represent freedom, democracy and moral authority. We still think we, both individually and collectively, are the good guys. We seem to be unable to separate the moral self-image of the individual from the morality of the state. And yet it stares us in the face.

The number of people that died in Iraq since the western aggression against that country started in 1990 has been estimated at several million. The economic sanctions imposed by the west between the first and second gulf war have cost an estimated 1.5 million Iraqi lives of which about 500.000 were children. When confronted with these numbers former US representative at the UN Madeline Albright stated that ‘it was worth it’. Hillary Clinton had a similar comment. I know of no western leader who back then condemned or denounced this and who acknowledged our actions as immoral and wrong. I could go on with numerous examples of how our western policies have resulted in mass casualties of civilians, including children, over the last few decades. If this one by itself does not start you to question morality nothing will. So if you’re not questioning now, maybe you should wonder why and take some time to contemplate the matter.

I do consider myself to be of high moral character. I have thought about this long and hard. I know right from wrong or at least I think I do. It is always tricky to confront ones own assumptions. I consider that what our western governments are doing is very, very wrong. I sense this clash between me as an individual and me as a member of a happy society that does, according to my individual sense of morality, evil. When I look around myself in my day to day life I don’t see it. Most people are like me. I feel like I fit in. Life looks nice and shiny. Bread and games for all. But when I widen the scope and see what those we let represent us do I shudder. And I feel sick to my stomach. For me there’s no doubt. The future historians will look at us and wonder in amazement. They’ll ask why we buried our head in the sand so deep, why we didn’t acknowledge the signs we were seeing. Why we didn’t call out our leaders on their immoral actions and attitudes. They’ll ask “how could they not have known they were the bad guys?”. Because we are. As long as we look away and do nothing we too are guilty. We enable the system and it fills me with shame. As long as we maintain our illusion and refuse to acknowledge that we are in fact not the free and democratic societies we pretend to be and do something about it we are as much to blame as our governments are.

R.Lesnoix is a concerned citizen who grew up during the Cold War under the constant fear of nuclear weapons. He is dismayed with the direction the western democracies are going in.

The Essential Saker II: Civilizational Choices and Geopolitics / The Russian challenge to the hegemony of the AngloZionist Empire

Leave a Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to get more info on formatting

(1) Leave the name field empty if you want to post as Anonymous. It's preferable that you choose a name so it becomes clear who said what. E-mail address is not mandatory either. The website automatically checks for spam. Please refer to our moderation policies for more details. We check to make sure that no comment is mistakenly marked as spam. This takes time and effort, so please be patient until your comment appears. Thanks.

(2) 10 replies to a comment are the maximum.

(3) Here are formating examples which you can use in your writing:
<b>bold text</b> results in bold text
<i>italic text</i> results in italic text
(You can also combine two formating tags with each other, for example to get bold-italic text.)
<em>emphasized text</em> results in emphasized text
<strong>strong text</strong> results in strong text
<q>a quote text</q> results in a quote text (quotation marks are added automatically)
<cite>a phrase or a block of text that needs to be cited</cite> results in:a phrase or a block of text that needs to be cited
<blockquote>a heavier version of quoting a block of text...</blockquote> results in:

a heavier version of quoting a block of text that can span several lines. Use these possibilities appropriately. They are meant to help you create and follow the discussions in a better way. They can assist in grasping the content value of a comment more quickly.

and last but not least:
<a href=''http://link-address.com''>Name of your link</a> results in Name of your link

(4)No need to use this special character in between paragraphs:&nbsp;You do not need it anymore. Just write as you like and your paragraphs will be separated.The "Live Preview" appears automatically when you start typing below the text area and it will show you how your comment will look like before you send it.

(5) If you now think that this is too confusing then just ignore the code above and write as you like.

Comment

Name:

E-mail:

113 Comments

Bravo! Thanks for expressing so well what I feel. But when I look around I don’t fit in at all. I try to make people around to see things and assume responsability and I end up being ostracized and considered conspiration-nuts or even worse hideous and bad company…

It is because these people “We have become moral Pavlov-dogs. Dangle a so-called noble cause in front of us and any action, any action, undertaken by us (our institutions/governments) instantly becomes justified no matter what the morality of that action itself actually is.”

It actually gives me hope that they have to put such gigantic efforts into lying to us.

They put forward massive efforts to lie to us and to manipulate us and to control how we think. They do this in order to further evil causes in this world, profiting by creating human suffering on a mass scale. It is obvious that they think that if we knew the truth, then not only would we not aid them, but that many would openly oppose them. So, they lie to us in many ways, and spent billions of dollars on lying to us. They create great propaganda systems, and they create massive surveilence systems to check for any who aren’t belieiving the propganda.

That tells me that even they think human beings are basically good at heart. They tell us that if we were left to our own thoughts, we’d oppose them and stop their evil intents.

Thus, I take comfort in seeing the huge lengths that they go to in order to lie to us. They have to do it, as its the only way their evil could not instantly fall and fail.

Thank you for your reply. Reading back my piece I see I wasn’t clear on this point. When I mention that people around me are like me and I feel I fit in this refers to my ‘normal’ everyday life. When I go about my daily business all this I wrote about seems far away and is easy to ignore. You just don’t see it back around you so you feel like all is well in our western ‘lands of milk and honey’. For me, the contrast between this and what we do abroad is so stark it makes me very uncomfortable. I have become so aware that it is not around me in my day to day life it almost feels like living in an illusion. It’s hard to describe exactly. Let’s say it feels wrong somehow.

But you are right that it is hard to talk about things like this. There are very few people in my personal life with whom I can talk openly about this without some sort of repercussion. Like it or not, the bearer of bad news tends to get at least some of the blame of confronting someone with what they’d rather ignore. All I can say is to pick your battles and start out small. Don’t go all-out right away. Point out the small contradictions and hypocrisies. Don’t tell people but ask them. Ask things like ‘why do you criticize every thing our politicians/media do domestically but always believe them when they blame other countries?’

It’s a lot to take in so ease people into it. Try to get them to think for themselves and ask their own questions. They have to start with doubt. You can’t throw them in the deep end and expect them to float right away, let alone swim on their own. Get them to doubt just one thing they’ve always assumed as beyond doubt and work from there, step by step. Take your time, give them time to contemplate and work their own opinions out in their own head. These are things most people don’t normally think about. And don’t assume you are right about everything either. After all, when it come to morality and right or wrong, much of it is based on opinions, not on facts. Try building a dialogue and be ready to agree to disagree on some issues.

I joined a counter-culture 50 years ago because I was convinced the dominant American culture could be quite evil. Things have gotten worse since then. But by now, you don’t have to ease me into it. :)

One thing I found is that if you convinced someone that one thing that they thought was true was actually a lie, then tended to open the doors of perception. That’s enough to get them to question more. If they continue down that path, then they will eventually question everything. But over the years, I’ve found that when talking with those who do question everything, that it all began when they questioned one thing and found that they had been lied to, and most likely deliberately and with malice aforethought.

This seems a very crucial topic. My first suggestion was we form a group but how convenient to find out who doesn’t believe them. When a person feels so strongly about the logic of all that is happening it is hard to not speak up and even harder to stay silent. It is like we are daily losing something of great value and no one else gives a hoot!

The near constant refrain of “there is nothing I can do about it anyway”, really sends me off. My reply, “If you live in a democracy you by definition can do something, so which is it democracy or oligarch?” Without a quick look up of oligarch the conversation is over. But the cognitive dissonance is real and I just plug along and try to be very peaceful, which is hard when you see the things the white helmets do to kids. Anyway great article and keep plugging away.

The PP, Parody President, seems hell bent on exposing how false flags work by doing them over and over, or is that just an unintentional bi-product of his orders from on high. He really over does it, I hope its like an intentional way of getting even with his masters, so hope springs eternal from the driest of founts. All the best to us lonely truthers.

Russia is nobody’s friend of ally except jews. It is the Jewish stooge. It protects it by perfidius means. For instance, it didn’t sell SS-300 defensive system to Syria so the Jewish plains can attack Syria through Libanese airspace. They refused the same recently to Lebanon Defence Minister in Moscow.
The Eastern Europeans know the Russians first hand by that they have them and scare them so much.

What a tight nut of carefully crafted half-lies and misinformation you have presented here!

Lebanon is a snake nest of the US special forces, the UK special forces, US, Saudis and NATO financial aids, and an army of international spies,

Lebanon should first reconsider servicing their airspace for the Israeli air force for attacks on Syria.

As for not SS-300 missile system to Syria…It would be wrong for many reasons, including the safety of the systems themselves, to deliver these systems in Spring 2013. Instead of shipping these systems alone, Russia just came in with them in September 2015.

The Eastern Europeans have only themselves to blame for their problems.

Lebanon is a complex power-sharing arrangement between a series of factions who were all fighting each other in a viscious civil war not that many years ago. If you want to sell weapons into “Lebanon”, you’d better know who you are selling to.

For instance, for awhile the USA was pumping weapons and money into the official Lebanese Army thinking it was a counter to Hezballah in Lebanon. If the government was asking for weapons from Russia, it was probably for the same force. But even then, when you say ‘government’ you still need to be specific as President Aoun is different from the Saudi stooge PM and different from the councils where Hezballah has won enough seats to be the largest but not majority party.

Scott, there is no need to talk to that nut . He comes here again and again to spit his bs .
Looks like he is one of those angry thieves, V. Putin kicked of the country, or, he might ran away himself . There are lots of those Russian oligarch / crooks hiding in Baltic states .

“When it finally ended Germans were, collectively, blamed for the crimes and misdeeds of their government. For most of them these came as a shock. Some were in denial and refused to accept them as true.”

In Hitler’s rise to power, he only got about 40% of the vote at his peak when he became chancellor. That was enough to make the Nazis the largest party in the Reichstag , but it still says 60% of the voters didn’t support him.

Then Hitler went through a stretch where to the Germans he did seem to hold the German economy somewhat together in the middle of the Great Depression. Then there was a stretch of foreign policy successes where he successfully bluffed and bullied his neighbors and Fr-UK. During this time, he almost certainly grew in popularity. Then the last of these bluffs started WW2. But the German Armies rolled into Poland, Denmark, Holland, Belgium and conquered the traditional enemy of France. The Brits were last seen jumping into boats and rowing for home. Again, this did not make Hitler unpopular.

Then, Hitler’s mistakes and the weaknesses of his fascist government started to take a toll. Invading Russia was of course a huge mistake, even if it didn’t seem so at first. But then everything went wrong. 250,000 thousand were lost at Stalingrad. Rommel got driven out of north Africa. The bombs started falling. They started drafting the young and the old. The economy that had enjoyed French wines and Belgium beef started to live under rationing. The Russians kept advancing, and the west invaded France. Everything was going wrong, and some could see defeat coming while they crouched in bomb shelters with their kids sharing their bread rations.

Then, the invaders came and liberated the death camps. That was when they asked the local town and everyone said “We Never Knew.”

Thus, it was complicated. Many opposed Hitler from the start. Many died for that. They were often the first to go to the camps. Many cheered Hitler and supported him when he was successful. Many doubted Hitler when the bombs started fallilng and the armies were retreating, but not too loudly because there are a lot of informers about. And of course when the great crimes were revealed, they knew nothing and it was all someone else’s doing.

During the 30’s, an American novelist wrote a book called “It can’t happen here.” He knew of course that it could happen here.

This book provides the quote “When fascism comes to America, it will come wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross.”

But it did.
Do you know about Prescott Bush and his attempted military coup of FDR in 1933 ?
It only failed because the plotters picked the wrong General to lead it.Smedley Butler who later wrote
the anti war pamphlet “War is a Racket”.
Bush and his merry band of powerful American industrialists,nazi’s were not punished.
In fact they carried on funding and outfitting Germany even thru’ WWII.
Operation Paperclip was not limited to rocket scientists,far from it,after that war.
The apple does not fall far from the tree, and Prescotts son and grandson became US presidents.
“History is a set of lies agreed to “,Napoleon Bonaparte.

Well, yes and no. The Germans are forever being accused and abused by the Shoah business and its Holocaust trademark, but face no condemnations whatsoever for what they did to Russia. But, then again, the Russians are not into the extortion business, and who are the Zionazis to cry over 27 million dead Russians?

I don’t think so. Recently, I learnt that it was we British, who were responsible for both world-wars, as German industry before WWI was absolutely caning us (Where’s Nikki Haley, when you need her ?) in the UK, our leaders having become accustomed to the less industrious occupation of parasitism, battening on our colonies – robbing them blind.

After Versailles, we had the gall and genocidal malice to blockade the German ports, starving many of their people; and it was that that is said to have brought Germany to the negotiating table and surrender.

German ports were blockaded after Versailles? I’d love to see a reference to that.

For WW1, it seemed that every nation had its factions that wanted war. Many spouted nonsense like a war would let people prove their manhood. And yes, there was a faction in England that was alarmed that Germany was a rising power. They were more alarmed that German chose to use this to build a fleet to challenge the sacred Royal Navy.

But that’s still some distance from saying the British started WW2. Last I checked, the British didn’t assasinate the Archduke in Sarajevo. The British did not issue an ultimatum to the Serbians. The British were not the allies of the Austrians who backed and stood by their allies. The British did not feel that they were the protectors of the Slavs. Those were the steps that led to World War 1. The French then joined because they honored their alliance with Russia. The British cabinet was very surprised to have the military tell them that they needed to honor secret deals between the British and French military, even though the civilian governments had never officially become allies.

Saying the British started WW2 seems an even bigger stretch. Britain did not bully and intimidate its way into taking the Rhineland, Austria and Czechoslovakia. Britain did not invade Poland. If anything, the what Britain is regularly accused of is of being too appeasing towards Hitler at the time of Czechoslovakia apparently hoping to avoid a war.

Or, maybe they did in the alternate reality you come from? Do you notice many other big differences between your timeline and ours? Maybe the British also bombed Pearl Harbor? I’m not trying to be facetious. I do seem to meet many people here for whom the only explanation is that they come from an alternate timeline where history unfolded differently, and I appreciate the Saker providing this place where people from alternate universes can meet and talk and compare notes.

And yes, they were responsible, together with the French (that were pushing for war for a long time) and, the Russians (who mobilized against the Austrians FIRST). In a sense, the Germans were the ones the least responsible for starting the war. They were very poor at propaganda though and also made some massive political blunders: starting with the abandonment of the alliance with Russia, after Bismark died, and ending with the invasion of Belgium which was conveniently used by Britain to silence its anti-war wing and go to war.

Moderator Note: Ad Hominem part of this post deleted. Prior post by this same poster was sent directly to the Trash. It was more of an attack on a prior poster than anything else. Attacks on other posters violate the Moderation Rules of this site. You can disagree with other posters ideas and opinions but attacking their intelligence is out of bounds.

The cell of the young terrorist who murdered the Arch Duke had been infiltrated by an MI6 operative, as most terrorists’ cell are by one intelligence service or another ; so he.was being played by the latter. You can read about it in Webster Tarpley’s article on terrorist attacks, not long after the 9/11.

I think it a mistake, if somewhat emotionally satisfying, to assign a smoking gun to a particular player as a cause of war. In reality there are multiple causes contributing to such events, all coming together at a particular time. That’s not to say that attempts to understand the causes are pointless, just that if we are truly interested in understanding the truth then scapegoating is a cop-out.

The Jewish Mafia’s default position is Bolshevism, Communism, Clinton Foundation nonsense, Helena Blavatsky-ism, who are invariably its creations and assets.

Considerably smaller, but equally important – think divide and conquer – are its counterpoints Fascism, White Supremacy-ism, National Socialism, Crowley-ism, who are also invariably Jewish Mafia creations as well.

Watching to much Jewish Mafia TV, the author of this piece doesn’t seem to be fully aware of these centuries old foundational principles of fooling humanity by way of deception.

For one thing, he still believes the fairy tale of the evil Nazis, who not unlike ISIS and Al Qaeda – managed to prosper, murder and strife seemingly unopposed in a 100% Jewish Mafia dominated world. Frankly, outside the domains of Hollywood, BBC and fake news, these things simply don’t happen.

Seeing the Jewish Mafia behind EVERY mass movement of recent history looks awfully like paranoia. The Jewish supremacists would love the accolade-it will feed their cosmic narcissism. The Jewish elites are immensely powerful and generally malignant, in my opinion at least, but there are other powerful forces at work in human affairs too.

Communism (and Bolshevism) was partly hijacked by Trotskyite pseudocommunism [= AngloZionist fascism].
This was then also used to somewhat credibly (e.g. Winston Chruchill) demonize Communism even more.
Of course the Germans of the 30s were not supposed to know the difference between AngloZionist fake-Communism (Trotsky & Co.) and genuine Stalinist [= non-AngloZionist] Communism/National Socialism.

Besides, no doubt the author is fully aware, as well, but otherwise _smr is perfectly right.

‘Nazism’ (the ‘white supremacist’ SS) and ISIS (ZioWahhabism, the ‘Islamist’ iS-iS) are 100% AngloZionist scams (think divide and conquer). What happened to the Sunni Middle East (e.g. Sunni Iraq) is not very unlike, and somewhat comparable to what the AngloZionists organized (WWI/WWII, the Hitler Project) in Germany.

One of the features of the human mind and soul, is that it will always, well almost always, go to great lengths to justify itself to itself. Very few people want to think of themselves as ‘the bad guys’. There are a few who do seem to adopt the role and take pride in their evil nature and evil acts. But they are the minority. I suspect I’ve seen more such characters in movies than I’ve met in real life.

Usually, its more the gangster who tells himself that he does this for his family. Saying they are doing it for their country is another way of avoiding the truth. There are lots of ways this occurs. We live in a world where many are forced to commit evil. The people for who the only job on offer was in the army. Or the people who work collections for a bank because it wsa the only job around.

Everyone tells themselves that they are not the bad guys. That’s what makes the joke so funny. :)

Yes, there are the sheep who don’t know or care to know what is going on in their name, but there are also many who know but who feel powerless, since their government commits evil acts without their consent or input, no matter who they vote for, and all mainstream media lies to them. Maybe the Germans felt the same way, powerless to oppose evil when it was happening.

Listen to this swill:
“UK Prime Minister Theresa May defended her “grave” decision to join the US-led strike against Syria without MPs’ consent. She maintained that the military action was “right and legal” and sends a message to “others.”

May said the Syrian government is to blame for the incident, citing “open source accounts” and non-governmental group reports”

So Twitter, Facebook and Hollywood Helmets can be judge, jury and executioner (in reverse order).
Well two can play at that game; how about setting up a social media ‘lynch’ mob to convict evil politicians like her?

I remember a famous SF short novel was “The sentinel” by Fredric Brown (1954). Pending a interplanetary war, there is a far outpost where a scared sentinel wait for the attack of the monstrous enemies. In a crescendo of thrill, at the end he kills one of those cruel horrible creatures, capable of incredible screams…

thanks for this ,the time has come to talk about these things…the history of mankind has always been WAR.Mankind is the only species that organises calculated slaughter of it’s own species.Most of the tax we modern slaves pay to our ‘lords’ go ultimately to the war industry, that is to kill other human beings.Nato is a killing machine so is the pentagon so is the red army and the chinese army,why do anyone thing that jet fighters and naval destroyers help protect any human being ,where are the MONSTERS i don’t see them maybe they are invisible and appear in dreams to or politicians and military men only.

two smart men raised this question..they are not with us anymore,their conclusion will shock everyone.We have met the enemy and it is us.

This site is one that one could call a pro-Russian site run by a Russian national and on this site here we now have an article that seemingly tries to explain or challenge the presumed(by the West) morale authority of the West and the method used being a supposed comparison between pre-WW2/WW2 Germany and today’s Western populations – with a majority of paragraphs dedicated to the evils of Germany/Germans and only a few to today’s Western populations.Of course most of these claims about the evil Germans of WW2 come from the same USA/UK/France and their allies, that are currently telling bold faced lies to the world, Skripal hoax, Syria chemical attack being the latest among a long list of lies, so can we really take USA/UK and France’s claims about the evil Germans of WW2 as true?

Considering the fact German-Russian relations have been improving in recent years and the timing, could not this article be considered at least in part divide and conquer propaganda?Certainly mixed in with truthful claims and observations, but could also be aimed at creating friction between Germans and Russians.Personally I would very much like to see an article about WW2 Germans from a Russian perspective on theSaker.

There’s an immense gap between the tales of the common soldier (which no one disputes or questions) and the bombastic, grotesque and ridiculous gas chamber narrative that has become the backbone of Zio F/UK/US lies about Germany.

They’re lying, lying, lying and then lying some more. Really, whoever believes the F/UK/US propaganda narratives that permeate our lifetime doesn’t care for the truth. As simple as that.

You’re right. When something doesn’t pass the logic test, it’s time to dig deeper. When the facts don’t match the narrative, it’s time to question authority. When asking questions can get you jailed? Well, now, you’ve probably found the fundamental truth.

And this is why “teh interweb” has failed miserably in enlightening people. The World Wars were planned and started by international banksters and their puppets. Modern history as we know it is a lie. Do you think the kabuki started with 9/11 and the WMD lies?

Yes, Herman Goring was partially correct. Grab 5 % of the right people in a country, and you might end up ruling that country (perhaps you don’t even need to grab 5 %, but less than that). The US is proof of this, and so is Sweden, whose elite is ruining the country, allowing mass immigration. However, Gorings opinion cannot always be applied, either in a negative or positive way. Germany and Russia are proof of this.

Before Hitler came to power, he wrote Mein Kampf. The first part of the book is remarkably boring, difficult to read, while the second part is absolutely incredible. He openly stated German plans for the Slavic lands in Russia, which he wanted appropriated and the Slavs reduced to slaves. He kept his promise. The bulk of the German Army in the Second World War was in Russia. Millions of Polish and Russian civilians were killed, either in war activities, or due to starvation, intentionally implemented. Hitler did not need to grab 5 % of the elite in Germany in order to attack Russia. He had history behind him, the old German and Slavic hatreds. In the Middle Ages quite a number of Germans emigrated to Russia, to the Volga region, becoming known as the Volga Germans. What is interesting is that there was virtually no assimilation, the Germans and Russians keeping apart. This says plenty.

When the Soviet Union collapsed, Yeltsin came to power in the Russian Federation. The West concentrated their attention on the elite in Russia, basically towards Yeltsin and the oligarchs (debatable how much success the West had with the Russian intellectual elite). The Russian Federation was almost ruined, and
Gorings opinion is certainly correct as far as the Yeltsin period goes. However, it is not correct when it comes to Putin. The Russian population, shocked by the Yeltsin period, rallied around Putin. The attempts of the Western NGO’s to create an oligarch type opposition to Putin, by grabbing the elite, were a miserable failure. Not even Soros bothered to organize any demonstrations against Putin after the March elections, as Putins victory was so obvious.

What conclusions can one draw ? Basically that history is the key to the future. If you want to know the future, look at history, both the positive and negative aspects of the same. Both need to be accepted. The negative ones can, perhaps, be prevented from occurring again.

I’ve been reading the hundreds of comments posted on the Saker community the last few days since this recent (and shocking, at least to me) U.S. cruise missile strikes on Syria. It seems our forum is split into two philosophical camps; Camp Alpha and Camp Bravo.

Camp Alpha: Russia did nothing, that’s good and the effectiveness of the attack was neutered.

I admit right up front I don’t agree with this position, at all. In fact I charge that all who support this view are closet “Neville Chamberlains”, which is a reference to Neville Chamberlain, former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom in the late 1930’s. We know the history of Chamberlain’s appeasement towards Nazi Germany and that outcome, no need to review the details.

The winds of war are fluid and ever swirling about; it’s crystal clear without a slightest doubt in my mind that Russia is in the crosshair of the western monsters who want to steal her resources and subjugate her people to the will of the uni-polar globalists. That is their long-term goal despite all the chaos that has happened in the Middle East, Southeast Asia and North Africa. Russia is the objective, the final prize and all this vitriol on the world’s stage is a diversion; a pool of red herrings to be consumed while the devil carefully orchestrates and maneuvers his minions to prepare them for the great battle in Eastern Europe in the near future.

We saw that Russia and the U.S. conspired behind the scene to permit this preplanned event. The parameters were agreed upon, however the Ministry of Defense had submarines lurking in the Mediterranean Sea just in case the U.S. backstabbed President Putin. The national news services presented this to the public as a military strike but in reality it was a live fire exercise, a “war game” where all inputs and outcomes were known. The plan appeared to work and now there is a pause as the world wipes the sweat off its collective brow with relief.

Who benefited more: Russia or the U.S.?

The U.S. and its propaganda machine won that hands down because the public thinks that Russia can be bullied anytime the Pentagon wishes to do so. Remember that American foreign policy is based upon the three “B’s”: bribing (with money), bullying (sanctions) and bombing (boom!). It’s been a successful rollout for them all these decades and therefore why should they discontinue it?

Russia may have gained something in time, which is not a trivial thing. It’s like a fighter who has lost a round and sits in his corner to gather his strength and think about what he did wrong. His manager talks strategy to him while his “cut man” tends to his facial wounds. The next time he’ll punch harder to the face and body because he doesn’t want to be on the receiving end of his opponent’s blows. So to with Russia, as its failure to repel the attack gave confidence to the U.S. to strike whenever it’s so inclined.

Camp Brave: Russia should have sternly declined to agree to the U.S. action and counter attacked those naval ships and aircraft that launched cruise missiles.

Let’s say for the sake of discussion, the U.S.S. Donald Cook (our favorite EW patsy) was hit by an anti-ship missile to its stern causing it to be unable to make steerageway, another words, “dead in the water”. Damage control parties would respond to the fires and there would certainly be casualties. Russia could easily claim that Russian soldiers were killed in the cruise missile strikes without having to provide proof, just like the U.S. doesn’t need evidence to administer its “vigilante justice”. The score is even as far as the number of dead (or so the world believes).

What would the warmongers. do, run to the UNSC to make some bloviation that means nothing or call the U.S. Congress together and rant about declaring war on Russia? As the Saker has responded to other questions that I agree with, “So what?”

The Congress of the United States is not going to issue a declaration of war because it would mean the end of their comfortable and safe lives in North America where no bombs have fallen and no invasion of their homeland is eminent. Yes, there would be a lot of barking by the poodles and the press would roll out the videos of dead American sailors and ship damage but when it comes to actually voting on war, it will not happen because behind the rich lifestyle that every congressperson enjoys breeds the underpinning of a coward.

Russia told the U.S. not to launch their missiles and they did it anyways and they had to suffer the pain of loss. That’s the way an actual war is fought because it’s not a ‘war game”; it’s real and blood is shed and property destroyed. The U.S. needs to feel the strength of the bear’s claw so it will remember not to repeat the mistake.

President Trump could employ a military tit-for-tit response but the armchair generals and admirals would have to approve it first which definitely puts all those naval assets in the Mediterranean Sea, Red Sea and Persian Gulf in great jeopardy as seen by what happened to the U.S.S. Donald Cook.

Regarding Camp Alpha and Neville Chamberlain I’m wondering why appeasement regarding Germany is seen as a mistake. I don’t know much about Chamberlain’s position on Poland, nevertheless in order to be historically correct someone has to mention that Poland and Germany grabbed parts of former Czechoslovakia. So, the UK decided to be an ally with Poland (a country that participated and benefited from an annexation), but Germany is condemned for the same action? That’s pure hypocrisy.

R.Lesnoix, while making many irrefutable, highly perceptive observations, doesn’t seem to acknowledge the fact that Nazi Germany was primarily modeled on the US Settler Reich of the 19th century. Moreover, this “Judeo-Christian” — with utmost stress upon the first part of the compound, mind you — Western pigsty has a 500 year legacy of Satanism to show for it. It’s not just about the 20th and 21st centuries. Old habits die hard, especially if they are of the rewarding kind.

Comparing yourself to the nazis seems ridiculous. It really isn’t. There was nothing different about them in the 1930s. The USA had major cultural ties and shared interests with the Germans. In fact the US copied the Prussian style of centralized education from the Germans to end the one room school houses and “instill the martial spirit” in American citizens. It obviously took hold here. Conversely the Germans copied US modern propaganda techniques. US citizens laugh at the propaganda Germans believed and wondered how they could believe a man like Joseph Goebbels. Goebbels had just copied Edward Bernays. He in fact had everything Bernays ever wrote in his library. “They were using my books as the basis for a destructive campaign against the Jews of Germany. This shocked me, but I knew any human activity can be used for social purposes or misused for antisocial ones.” Quote from Edward Bernays. If you really want to scare yourself just read Milton Mayer’s classic book They Thought They Were Free. If you were going to read one book on Nazi Germany this is the one!!!!!! http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/511928.html

You certainly know that the “Big Lie’ trope attributed to Goebbels was in fact said by Hitler according to whom, the “Big Lie” was a propaganda technique typically used by “the Jews”:
“All this was inspired by the principle—which is quite true within itself—that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods.
It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.
— Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, vol. I, ch. X

And for Goebbels, the supposed ‘inventor’ of the Big Lie:

“Goebbels wrote the following paragraph in an article dated 12 January 1941, 16 years after Hitler’s first use of the phrase. The article, titled Aus Churchills Lügenfabrik (English: “From Churchill’s Lie Factory”) was published in Die Zeit ohne Beispiel.
“The essential English leadership secret does not depend on particular intelligence. Rather, it depends on a remarkably stupid thick-headedness. The English follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous”.

This is what many peoples don’t want to look up to, because of …Fear ! this Fear is the proof of how powerful the brainwashing has been and still is. So where lies the “mea culpa” ? on those who entered the dance and lost the war, or on those who entered the dance and are still dancing today not willing to understand why the others lost the war, meanwhile believing they are the winners ? What were the causes of war and what are today the causes of so many wars ? Isn’t the Lie the winner of the wars – as well the perpetrator ?

Thanks very much for this article. I wrestle daily with these concerns, which you have expressed so well.

Still, I wonder: what can we say to those around us who are either zombified by the media, who don’t question anything deeply, and to the others who “know” something is wrong but who look away, thinking that averting their attention will absolve them of responsibility?

Look let’s keep simple people there two kinds of people in the world: Jews and gentiles. The Jews, while only representing 3% of global population are kicking ass—while because the confused and misinformed gentile keeps getting pulled away from the men behind the curtain. Who’s in the forefront of all of this chaos, who benefits from the chaos, who reports the status of the chaos? Look there may be others but let’s do some deep interrogation of those we know to be involved and if their our others they will be happy to share their identities with especially if they are gentiles. What am trying to say: It’s the zionists!

To the governments and people of Russia and China, the civilized people of the United States and the world.

The definition of “Waging Aggressive War” is a military conflict waged without the justification of self defense…and not sanctioned by the United Nations. This is the most heinous crime defined by man.
The governments of the United States, United Kingdom and France through their militaries have perpetrated an illegal and dastardly attack on the sovereign nation of Syria. Any and all those in authority who ordered the attack are guilty of WAGING AGGRESSIVE WAR. Any one who assisted in any way are accomplices, and/or accessories to the crime and are equally guilty and are subject to arrest and prosecution without time limit.. The excuse of following orders will not be accepted, that means you Trump (what a weak, pathetic, prevaricating recreant you turned out be), the abject coward Bolton, Mattis, Dunford, Lindsey “the Punk” Graham, the loud mouth half wit Haley, Macron, May, and all others who carried out the illegal orders or anyone who had the ability to prevent the attack and didn’t.
The criminals listed above have made it expressly clear they are out to control the world and will destroy any country or people who stand in their way. This is a confirming warning to you and your people, the people of the United States and the world. It will be easier for the criminals to destroy us individually as opposed to collectively. Any and all nations and individuals who work to prevent such a crime are completely justified to use any means required and at their disposal to stop their crime spree and will have the full support of civilized humanity.
We all have the human RIGHT and DUTY to protect ourselves from these obviously insane, avaricious, and homicidal people. They represent an existential threat to all of mankind and need to be collected, and separated from the rest of us, permanently.
I realize that these criminals believe that they are untouchable because they currently cower behind a bunch of men with guns. But through our unified effort they will learn that they are not invincible and are subject to arrest, trial and punishment. The civilized world will no longer tolerate their type of actions. Together we will bring them to justice and rid ourselves of their stench. After the United States cleanses itself of these mass-murdering cancers, we will rejoin the community of nations as a peaceful and productive contributor.

” They try to find a valid reason why their uniforms would have skulls on them. When they fail to do so and can only come up with negative associations the first one looks the other in the eye and asks hesitantly “Are we the bad guys?”

What if in the mouth of the skull there are 2 bones ? Skull and Bones !

A very amusing article, as profoundly serious articles often tend to be, at least in snatches.

As regards the position of the ordinary Germans, however, as you indicated further down, even those who would have recogised the wickedness of the Nazi regime, and recoiled at its cruelty, were basically, themselves, terrroised by that same domestic regime, and would have been, in the event, were, executed for persistently and publicly defying its mandates.

The Poles have come in for a lot of ‘flak’ from the Israelis and Jewish people, generally, for the connivance of presumably quite a few Poles with the Nazi regime, yet I beliieve the record for the number of ‘righteous Gentiles’ in the eponymous memorial to them in Jerusalem is held by the Poles – who were unique in being summarily executed if found harbouring Jewsih fugitives from their Nazi persecutors, as many evidenrtly did.

Still, your general point is obviously valid and significant in terms of human societies – we allow outselves to be hoodwinked by our wall-to-wall domestic propaganda all too easily. A turning-point, and shamefully an eye-opener to me, in my late sixties, was the online tract by the American marine general Smedley-Butler, called War Is a Racket.

My first hint of enlightenment concerning our domestic propaganda was the discovery of the treatment of the Irish Catholics during the Troubles, in the sixties. After that, it became all too often, hilariously – when not infuriatingly – obvious.

MK Bhadrakhumar in his : Trump opens a Pandora’s box in ME quotes Russian colonel-general Sergei Rudskoi: ” A few years ago, taking into account a pressing request from SOME of OUR PARTNERS, we abandoned the supplies of the S-300 missile system to Syria. ”
Now all who want to see that defending Syria is not a priority for Russians but SOME of their PARTNERS.
Who these PARTNERSA is easy to guess, isn’t it ?

Friend R.Lesnoix,
Thanks for these deep thoughts.
“People tend to have a natural inclination to follow institutionalized authority without questioning its moral legitimacy. Its moral legitimacy is assumed.”
According to The WSJ, Trump had wanted to include “a strike Russian air defense in Syria, and also on Iranian facilities.” https://sputniknews.com/world/201804161063598759-trump-strikes-syria-reports/
Whether he personally wanted to provoke Russia to war (for that’s what this amounted to) or not is not the point: it just shows there are people wanting such a war, and they’ll not find it hard to push Trump into it. And his readiness to call God’s blessing on his attack shows he is also willing to work on the American psyche, convincing them that God has appointed them to right the wrongs of the world.
Now, we know the American people have long been psyched to believe Russia is at once a very weak country (to which Trump, as a good Christian, offered economic assistance following his “nice, new, smart missiles” tweet) – and America’s deadly enemy.
It is therefore easy to switch American people into a “destroy Russia” mood, and get them to go along with such a war, without even stopping to think of the danger to their very survival.
Theresa May is working hard to achieve similar goals in an already viciously Russia-hating Britain. And Macron is working just as hard on his own people, judging by his grandiloquent TV interview last night:
“Putin is complicit” in poisoning babies. He has “incapacitated the international community” with his evil diplomatic tricks, but we’ll get our way in the end: “We have now convinced President Trump to remain on the ground [in Syria]”
You are right: it is difficult to bring people to believe their leaders are lying to them. But I’d add that even if it could be demonstrated that their leaders are manipulating them with what to us are obvious lies, the people would still chose not to believe the evidence staring them in the eyes: psychologically, this fact is too destabilizing even to entertain. To whom will they turn, if they turn their back on their government?
If even the media cannot support their revolt, but instead align with the government, how can they revolt?

Brilliant essay. I feel exactly the same.
I think the Nazi example might cause some controversy but point taken.
I would like to comment on this ‘judeo/christian’ description.
While it appears to be an accurate description of our society, it is an oxymoronic term.
You can’t be both Judeo and Christian…. It does not compute….they are mutually exclusive.
And this is the problem.
Christianity itself has been hijacked and perverted.

An individual can’t be both at the same time but society can use more than one religion or other belief system as its building blocks. In the case of judaism and christianity this is even more the case because of the shared content of both i.e. the old testament.

In addition, throughout much of history the jews in Europe were limited to the roles they were allowed to play in society and jobs they were allowed to have. But the roles and jobs they were allowed did put many of them in positions of influence. That’s the thing about society, it’s not formed all at once but forms over time. At different points in this timeframe different actors with different agendas and different belief systems exert influence over how the society develops.

The influence differs per country off course. Where the inquisition and counter-reformation was strong jewish influence seems to have severely diminished during the time nation-states arose while it appears to have grown in countries with a strong protestant presence. Where I’m from it’s taken for granted our country is predominantly based on Judaeo-Christian values. There’s no deeper meaning intended. It simply refers to both the commonality between the two religions and the influence both had separately. While the balance between the amount of influence both had on different countries over the centuries certainly differs in my opinion both significantly influenced the development of the moral foundations of all our countries either directly in Europe or indirectly in North America and the Pacific as these regions were initially colonized by mostly protestant settlers.

I accept your points again.
The problem starts with the joining together of the Old and New Testaments.
I’m no theologist but it seems to me that Jesus Christ and the New Testament repudiate the Old.
“The commandments of men” is how Christ dismisses it [them].
How did they come to be joined together and why are they given equal weight?
It’s ridiculous. How do you create a moral and sustainable culture with mutually exclusive philosophies?

I agree, we are Judaeo-Christian.
We are Judaeo in as much as we seek dominion over the earth and it’s people.
We are Judaeo in as much as we smite those who resist us in our quest
We are Judaeo in as much as we smite those who have helped us in our quest.
We are Judaeo in as much as we covet our neighbours belongings.
We are Judaeo in as much as we seek revenge for sins against us.
Etc.

We are Christian in as much as we pay lip service to the philosophy of Jesus Christ.

“How do you create a moral and sustainable culture with mutually exclusive philosophies?”

By discarding or disregarding the conflicting parts. Enduring religions are enduring because at the core of their philosophy are basic, healthy rules for how to construct a long lasting society. Religions that don’t have this tend to die off.

Strip the Bible, especially the New Testament, of the elements that require divine belief and you are left with a very useful and practical handbook for a stable and enduring (non-religious) society. Like it or not, but it are these non-divine elements that make up the core building blocks of our countries values. We then added, to various degrees, values of divine elements of different christian and jewish denominations. This accounts for the variations between countries. But the core of values is actually non-religious.

You do not have to believe in God for example to acknowledge that the basic contents of the ten commandments make sense for any society. In my opinion this is why Christianity was so successful, not because of the divine parts but simply because societies that became christian became more stable and more enduring. What the divine element did add was the propensity to spread and promulgate. Together these made a great combination making christianity the dominant religious force it became.

Jesus was a Jew if a bit of a dissident from the elite clerics of the time. All his disciples were Jews. Christians didn’t then exist. He based his teaching on the Jewish holy books, with a few variations and updates. The term Judeo-Christian is widely accepted because it is apt when applied to our culture, regardless of whether one is a Christian or not, because of the huge influence it has had.

I think it’s fair to say that Jesus and His disciples were the first Christians.
My guess is the term Judaeo-Christian was slipped into the lexicon by a clever devil in a long past generation. Just as they cleverly attached and printed the Old Testament in front of The New Testament.
If JC was the editor of His own bible, what do you think He would do?

My feeling exactly. Usually both sides of a conflict can claim the moral high ground, all soldiers need to think they do the right thing to accept the risk of dying for a higher cause, but in this instance the west si so morally bankrupt that I only feel shame and depression.

R, my point to add to your comment is as follows: Why didn’t people feel the way you feel in the old days?
I believe some did, but here I have two options:
In the feudal days, people had no choice. Their lord or land owner send his hired goons to his villages and told the male peasants to get ready. If they didn’t they were impaled high so others could see their suffering for not submitting to the “lord’s” rule.
In the post feudal days, ruling class (no matter, royals of “revolutionaries” released huge propaganda about their country being attacked by their long “hated” neighbor, thus all the brainwashed people stood up, or just got drafted. No one questioned the official narrative, the ones who dared were stung out on some poles for treason.
Today, while it lasts, we have internet, which gives us the alternative view and it’s up to us, if we can, to chose the view.

Even without the internet there have always been alternative presses, news sheets, ways of getting a different viewpoint if you were willing to look for it.
And that is the main problem, most people aren’t willing, or are unable for a variety of reasons to put in the work for themselves and would rather just take what is spoonfed to them.

The best article I have ever read. A very big Thank You for that , Mr. Lesnoix .
I’ve thought on this so many times . You’ve touched my personal / family pain ( my son, one the most honest and decent persons, a patriot of his /our country – Ukraine, can not except that his gov. is criminal . I do not speak with him on this any more.) –https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKuDzXAgdf4
English is not my native language and I’m not so eloquent as you are to express my thoughts and discuss the subject , but I need more your articles like this . Thank you, once again .

I don’t know about that, we had the funny ‘Derry Girls’ sitcom with those fabulous Northern Irish accents and the car industry has been sold off like all the rest of the family silver, plenty of jokes about that too if you know where to look.

One example of what facilitated the evil state the ‘West’ is in – the BBC. A source of truth? It never was – ever. The BBC was the main propaganda arm, financed by the British Government’s ‘Telly Tax’, that enabled all the rubbish about Iraqi WMD to be broadcast. That ‘truth’ was then used to condition the Working Class to accept, and many to support, the illegal (under Nuremburg criteria) invasion of Iraq.

To explain, from a worker’s point of view, why I believe things are as they are from personal experience: before the invasion of Iraq, I was the only person who would point out the inconsistencies in the ‘war party’ camp at the workplace. It was a well paid and useful job – but I was drummed out for being ‘bad for morale’.

The social pressures on people to get in line with the MSM commentary is strong – particularly if they have families. Like Nazism in Germany during WWII, the need to be a good cardholding party member ended with their whole society infested with these people from top to bottom. The truth teller became an enemy of the state and thus the people’s enemy. Everyone knows how that ended.

This time, the stakes are even higher – not just a country, but the World is now on the table.

An informative book on this and more was written by Alfred Noyes, in 1942, entitled ‘The Edge of the Abyss’ He shows clearly that the moral decline into relativism began during the Great War of 1914-18. It’s copyright free now (or should be) get the PDF download and find out just how bad it’s got since.
I attended the anti-war marches in London – did not see one, single, Trades Union placard protesting what was happening.

Back in the day, when Saddam Hussein was the darling of the West, and buying their weapons by the shipload, I remember seeing a TV news broadcast, showing the dreadful massacre of Kurdish civilians in Iraq’s Halabja.

This shocking vision remains with me to this day, many decades later: The TV screen shows a woman, holding her tiny little baby in her arms, lying dead on the ground just meters from her own front door. The announcer (Channel Four news) said the following: “Well, that’s Saddam being Saddam, I suppose. Anyway, on now to the sporting results”.

Nothing was ever the same to me after. The evil is real, and it is with us.

The answer is we are the bad guys and have been the bad guys for a long time. I lived through the cold war, served in the US Army, and am a former true believer in the USA. But a reading of history beyond the high school/college brainwashing will answer your question. Some glaring examples are according to one biographer, Hitler was inspired by our Indian Reservations in designing his concentration camps. Here is a nice quote from one of General Philip Henry Sheridan, “The only good Indians I ever saw were dead.”

In more recent times look at the CIA backed coup in Guatemala in 1954 and the subsequent support of military dictators during the civil war there. A quote from Wikipedia: Numerous other human rights violations were committed, including massacres of civilian populations, rape, aerial bombardment, and forced disappearances. Since the perpetrators of these crimes were our allies there were no missile strikes to punish the government there.

Other examples are the coups in Iran and Chile replacing democratically elected governments with dictators.
How about are support for the government of El Salvador during the 1970s and 80s? We had no problem with their death squads, even when they killed American nuns. Oh, but we were so concerned about the success of the Sandinistas in overthrowing our dictator in Nicaragua we organized the Contras to overthrow them. Of course we didn’t care what the Somoza government did to its citizens.

Now we accuse Assad of using chemical warfare but we had no problem with the use Agent Orange in Vietnam. The people there are still suffering from the aftermath and everyone knows at least one Vietnam veteran who died from exposure to that chemical.

The list could go on and on.Someone probably could write a PhD dissertation on this subject. But the answer is Yes, We are the bad guys. Its just that they have done such a good brainwashing job on us that we do not recognize it

A little side note. There is a Holocaust Museum in Washington and memorials all over the country. Why aren’t there museums and memorials for the Native American Holocaust?

Concentration camps were invented, and first used, by the British Empire during the South African wars against the Dutch Boers.
The Empire was unable to subdue the brave and resourceful Boers, who were clever horsemen and good with the rifle. The Empire sent more men, still to no avail. Then the idea came to them, that a war against the Boer’s families might win the battle, so they put all the women and children behind barbed wire, with little shelter from the sun and no proper sanitation. Nature took her course, and soon they were dying of heatstroke, dysentery fever, and the like. The Boers had to capitulate, and the Empire ‘won’.

God always commands his people to submit to Him period in all things. We however as a faithless people choose to take matters into our own hands and look what Trump did he actually justified his actions as though he were God’s tool to pass punishment upon Syria. The lack of education is utterly unbelievable and look what we have now proof that what happened in Douma well there was no chemical attack!

We have just spoken to Robert Fisk (Foreign correspondent with the UK Independent) in Douma, at 13.00 today, who says he is the 1st journalist to visit the clinic where the “alleged” chemical attack took place. He went alone ie. not accompanied by military to see for himself. Everything is operating as per normal in a hospital. He confirms the following:
1. The footage is authentic – he could recognise the location
2. He spoke to doctors there who said that children were admitted coughing and spluttering
3. They were admitted AS A RESULT OF NEARBY SHELLING and DUST FUMES!
4. Someone created panic by shouting “gas, gas, gas” and they began following procedure as they would in a gas attack by hosing them down.
5. THERE WAS NO CHLORINE GAS ATTACK

This young girl from Yemen, is a victim of a chemical attack in her own country by the Saudi Arabians, the chemical used was white phosphorus…. so why are we not bombing Saudi Arabia, and taking out their chemical weapons with air strikes?

by the way why is it that mankind thinks they are the ones who can exact revenge or punishment upon a nation when God clearly says in scripture that its His work ie: Climate change:

The Lord will cause people to hear his majestic voice and will make them see his arm coming down with raging anger and consuming fire, with cloudburst, thunderstorm and hail. (Isaiah 30:30)

Rain will come in torrents, and I will send hailstones hurtling down, and violent winds will burst forth. Therefore, this is what the Sovereign Lord says: In my wrath I will unleash a violent wind, and in my anger hailstones and torrents of rain will fall with destructive fury. {Ezekiel 13:11-13}

In all candor, the more I learn about the manipulations of populations and media, the more I perceive there are no “good guys”, but a few manipulators (one may judge each for him or herself) and a great population of manipulated. The manipulation in the U.S. was not substantially different from the Nazi propaganda, and the actions in war very little different. Saturation bombing, however, did start with the Brits. People appeal to the Nuremberg Tribunals as the climactic judgment of the Nazis, but it was no such thing. It was no trial, but a public judgment on the Losers by the Winners.

I think that assigning collective blame to all the zombies and regular people who may be quiet only because they do not know any better is going too far. That path leads into expanding war onto exterminating the entire civilian population merely because “they support the unjust war by paying taxes” or a similar excuse.

No, those who are awake and aware of where our western governments are taking us ought to speak up even if it is to their closest social circle. But those who are still asleep, only worrying about their next bill, bear no blame. Until they are awoken by the rest of us and become us, they bear no blame.

“When it finally ended Germans were, collectively, blamed for the crimes and misdeeds of their government. For most of them these came as a shock.”

Yes my friend, but the shock was *not* due to the sudden revelation of government criminality but rather to the fact that it had unexpectedly *ended* ..followed immediately by the subsequent realization that now there would be an upcoming hell to pay.

Likewise the culpable Amerikan Sheeple should and shall be blamed for the crimes and misdeeds of their government once their inevitable collapse gets further underway. Average American’ts should also face a hell to pay scenario, even if said punishment if limited only to international ostracization. Like the metastasized cancer that its international military meddling represents, quarantining the U.S. should be the first order of business before further treatment. This is in fact already naturally occurring as more & more nations openly break ranks with a collapsing Washington DC’s desperate attempts to maintain it dominant position as a player.

An excellent article and an excellent historical analysis, thank you R.Lesnoix!

“We have killed, directly or indirectly, children not by the hundreds, not by the thousands, not by the tens of thousands but by the hundreds of thousands over the last few decades in order to make the world ‘free’ and ‘safe for democracy’.”

The Americans and their allies are worse than the Good Germans of World War 2.

In this day and age of the internet and global communications that allow you to listen to viewpoints that counter the Western “free press” (if you so choose), you cannot plead ignorance to American Axis crimes or say that you “didn’t know.”

As such, there will be a day of judgement that these self-styled champions of freedom and democracy will have to face.

I guess a lot of it comes down to the power of the media. Hitler recognised that power & used it to the full just as governments do to this very day around the world. Everybody else is brainwashed by their media but not us…we see through it. But really we don’t.

Many in the western world identify as Christians for example and the Christian …

The Christian Democratic Untion (CDU) and her sister party Christian Social Union (CSU in Bavaria) are Christian in name. According to their policies they should rename their parties into Pharisaean Democratic Untion and Christian Social Union. Most politicians of both parties are neo-liberal to the core. Even worse is their “law-and-order” rhetoric. Just recently CSU copied US laws (similar to the Nazis inspiration by Jim Crow – Hitler’s American Model: The United States and the Making of Nazi Race Law; https://www.amazon.com/Hitlers-American-Model-United-States/dp/0691172420): now people can be incarcerated if they appear to be a threat to national security. Of course the lawmakers didn’t specify threat. Maybe today some Muslim is seen as a thread. Maybe tomorrow a political opponent or a union leader will be seen as threat. Our German “Christian” parties are marching in the same direction as the Nazis before. (On a side note: of all existing post-war parties, most former Nazis ended up in CDU/CSU.)

Any Australian reading this should reflect that the population of Syria was before the war almost equal to that of Australia. Out of the 21 million Syrians – 600,000 lie dead; 2 million have been physically wounded (millions more psychologically traumatised and grief stricken) and 14 million displaced from their homes. Seven years and counting of brutal war (longer than WW-II). Imagine that inflicted upon Australia. Imagine then that the citizens of the countries doing it to us were indifferent and brain-washed by their media.

It gets worse – research “organ harvesting/trafficking” + “Syrian refugee camps”. At least 18,000 (must be thousands more since that figure quoted) have sold their organs out of desperation to raise funds to flee to Europe or just get money to live, but worse – children in particular are being harvested for organs, Christian Syrians seem particularly targeted and much of this appears to be forced organ harvesting and murder.

This monstrous process has been reported over the years of the Syrian War in a number of mainstream media outlets including The Independent (Ireland), The BBC, Salon, Haaretz and Times of Israel, as well as by independent alternative media and Sputnick News.

Yes – another Holocaust is unfolding, but instead of harvesting gold dental fillings, it is the even more lucrative human organs: We are the good Germans during the holocaust – whether citizens of The West, of Israel, of Saudi Arabia, Jordan or Turkey.

Wonderful analysis Mr Lesnoix, full of juice and nicely expressed.
We are undoubtedly the bad guys.
I feel ashamed to be represented by sociopathic global chicken hawks and frustrated by the general public’s lack of awareness of the actual – we are the bad guys doing very bad things on a global scale – situation.

Maybe we need a miracle to sink the Anglo-American war party but it encourages me no end to read to your honest, truthful work and the enlightened readers comments.
Their’s hope yet the truth will prevail over lies.

We have killed, directly or indirectly, children not by the hundreds, not by the thousands, not by the tens of thousands but by the hundreds of thousands over the last few decades in order to make the world ‘free’ and ‘safe for democracy’. Somehow that’s okay with us.

What a fantastic article. I have been struggling with this dilemma for a long time. I have wonderful and intelligent friends who endorse their govt’s attacks on Iraq, Libya, etc, convinced of their moral high ground, and I have been the solitary voice against these attacks. You have now clarified for me, so beautifully, the reasons why they are wrong, and I can now confront them adequately armed. Many, many thanks.

Sitemap

Saker Android App

An Android App has been developed by one of our supporters. It is available for download and install by clicking on the Google Play Store Badge above.

All the original content published on this blog is licensed by Saker Analytics, LLC under the Creative Commons CC-BY-SA 4.0 International license (creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0). For permission to re-publish or otherwise use non-original or non-licensed content, please consult the respective source of the content.